Australia’s future Naval Group Attack class submarine design which may be 4,500 tonnes (surfaced) may require diesels with a total electrical output of 6,000kW. This is noting that the 6,000kW is not only for propulsion, but also for the “hotel load” (eg. electrical power for combat system electronics and air-conditioning).

After SubMatt’sarticle of March 5, 2019 on German (MTU or MAN) diesels for the Attack class Anonymous commentedwith a range of figures to air issues:

To achieve a total 6,000kW electrical output, 6 diesel generators (probably German designed MTU or MAN) are needed [1].

The Attack class design (beam 8.8m) could arrange its 6 x diesel generators in 2 parallel rows of 3 diesel generators [2].

In comparison the length of Japan’s unselected entry (J-SEA1000) for Australia Attack class SEA1000 competition may have involved these measures. J-SEA1000 without AIP but with 4 x higher powered Kawasaki diesel generators would have been 90-92m long. Naval Group’s Attack class design is 97m long so it may possibly have AIP.

The following is just a suggestion. In the case of the Attack class involving AIP totalling 100MW and 6,000kW diesel generators, indiscretion ratio (IR), may all point to a performance index of a submarine is very roughly estimated to be 3% [3],and in the case of non-AIP it may be 4-5%. This is a pretty good performance index.

An MTU 12V4000U83 for submarine. See another view at Penske Power Systems (Australia and New Zealand).

---

[1]The MTU V12 4000 U83 (diagram above) has a mechanical output of 1,300kW and electrical output of 1040kW.

The MAN 12 PA4V200 SMDS (diagram below) has a mechanical output of 1330kW and electrical output of 1064kW.

The MAN 12 PA4V200 SMDS (preceding link is about 5MB PDF) submarine diesel. May be used on Australia's future Attack class and the Netherland's Walrus replacement.

---

[2]Estimated cross section of Attack-class from various pictures: diameter of pressure hull (d) = 8.8m, thickness of hull steel (a) = 0.05m, thickness of sound absorbing rubber (b)= 0.10 m, width of hull stiffener ring (c) = 0.25m, width of diesel (f) = 1.7m, average distance between diesel-diesel or diesel – hull stiffer (Y). Then, Y=(d-2a-2b-2c-3f)/4= (8.8-2x0.05-2x0.1-2x0.25-3x1.7)/4 =0.72m.

As Y=0.4m for Walrus-class (3 x diesel generators arranged in parallel) and Y=0.5m for SAAB-Damen submarine design (beam 8m, maybe 2,300 tonne surfaced?) (3 x (MTU or MAN(?)) diesel generators arranged in parallel)

The beam of the Australian Collins-class (7.8m) is slightly less than that of SAAB-Damen submarine (8m). I believe diameters of the two submarines are same, and difference in beam is due to position and shape of flank array sonars of the two submarines.

Last year, the Australian Submarine Corporation (ASC) entered into an agreement with SAAB for the provision of a range of services. The experience of ASC with the Collins-class not only supports the A26 Project but also will be useful for design and building of the SAAB-Damen submarine. The future SAAB-Damen submarine design will be based on the existing and reliable submarine (Collins) platform to some extent.

[3]Calculation in the case of 100MW AIP and 6MW GEs

(1) AIP: 100MW

(2) Energy consumption per day ca.6MW =[hotel load (180kW) + propullsion 60kW] x 24 hours

(3) Operation 10 weeks = surveillance 7weeks (ca.50days) + transition 3weeks (ca.20days)

(4) Required battery energy per day for surveillance = Energy consumption per day – energy suppled from AIP = 6MW-100MW/50days = 4MW

(5) Charge period = (4)/electrical output of GEs x 1hour =4MW/6MW x 1hour = 0.67 hours

(6) IR = charge period (hours) / 24 (hours) x100 (%) = 2.8%=0.67/24 x 100 =2.8%

Anonymous
(with some rearranging by Pete)

"Soumarsov", an expert on submarines built by Russia, has pointed Pete to a Russian language FlotProm (FP) article written by Dmitry Zhavoronkov, dated March 7, 2019 indicating:

The development of Russian air independent propulsion (AIP) for submarine is “suffocating” due to underfunding. [Modern AIP allows a diesel-electric submarine to remain fully submerged for around 3 weeks rather than about 3 days].

Russian companies involved in AIP development, “have suspended work due to underfunding.” According to sources in Russia's Rubin Submarin Design Bureau and the Central Research Institute of Ship Electrical Engineering and Technology (TSNII SET).

This underfunding situation has occurred for 18 months.

[The difficult to translate FP article] appears to indicate underfunding may delay AIP for Russia’s Lada class submarine (Project 677) until 2027.

In January 2018, industry sources told FP the Malakhit Central Design Bureau (part developer of AIP) was waiting for funds to continue work on its part of the AIP Project. “More than a year later” [in March 2019?] “the situation has not changed”.

[Hard to translate words maybe implying: India’s DRDO might help fund Russia’s AIP Project as Russia’s Lada (export design Amur-1650 ) submarine is a competitor in India’s Project-75(I) for 6 AIP conventional diesel electric submarines (SSKs) for India.]

See more on the Indian-Russian Lada-Amur connection in this Russian language FlotProm (FP) article of February 22, 2019.

PETE COMMENT

With Russia's limited GDP, stretched defence budget and inefficient system of competing design bureaus, Russia has had trouble finding the money for all submarine sectors. This means Russia's highest priority is nuclear submarine development, then non-AIP Kilo (Project 877 and 636) diesel-electric submarine upgrades

and finally a relatively small budget is being shared among competing design bureaus for AIP (Lada class Project 677-Amur) development. However Russia has a chicken-and-egg problem in trying to export Amur submarines (with AIP being the main selling point) before Russia has actually developed AIP.

Understandably there have been no serious Amur buyers (not even Morocco). Hence Russia has received no AIP development funding from Amur export sales.

India has bought many high priced Russian weapons systems, even part funding Russia's troubled stealth fighter program. But even India's defence research and development organisation (DRDO) might hesitate to fund Russian AIP. This is because AIP takes decades to develop and only Germany, Sweden and maybe China have developed modern AIP.

FURTHER READING

see this August 5, 2014 Submarine Matters article in part on the "Russian Kristall-7E AIP"

Pete (with much help from Soumarsov's tipoff)

(Courtesy Saab), the following is an infographic, text and Youtube presentation of some Saab-Damen industrial plans to replace the Netherland's 4 Walrus submarines. Pete has added some background and comments in square [...] brackets.

"How the Saab-Damen consortium will meet the Dutch requirement in replacing the Walrus class

02 March 2019:

See larger, clearer infographic here.

---

Saab and Dutch shipbuilder Damen Shipyards Group [website] have joined forces to develop an expeditionary submarine for the Netherland´s Walrus Replacement Programme (WRES).

[Backgound on the Netherland's Walrus subs and replacement here. Pete comment - there will most likely be 4 Walrus replacement subs, (weighing 2,350 - 2,650 tons) in service in the early 2030s.]

Take a look at the infographic above to get an overall understanding of the various steps of the program, or watch the film below. The production process will see sections made in Sweden and then assembled in Vlissingen in the Netherlands.

3 minute Saab youtube published March 15, 2019.
---

“Replacing the Walrus-class submarines requires a unique approach. Swedish modular submarine design and production techniques coupled with the Dutch shipbuilding tradition bring together the capabilities needed to deliver an assured operational capability”, says Gunnar Wieslander, Senior Vice President, head of business area Saab Kockums.

The Expeditionary Submarine builds on the capabilities of the Swedish A26 [Saab is building 2 x A26s for the Swedish Navy - see some Saab details] combined with Dutch Submarine technology and puts into practice the experience of the Dutch designed Walrus submarine class and of the Swedish designed Collins-class submarine [Wiki] in-service with the Australian Navy.

“The result of the collaboration will be a customer-adapted submarine for expeditionary missions. This will ensure that the Royal Netherlands Navy continues to play an important role in European waters as well as globally”, says Hein van Ameijden, managing director of Damen Schelde Naval Shipbuilding.

In addition, the Walrus replacement will also benefit from the operational lessons reflected in the Swedish Navy’s Gotland [Mid Life Upgrade]. As a result the Expeditionary Submarine will be equipped with state of the art technology whilst benefiting from de-risking on four submarine classes. Saab and Damen are thereby creating one of the most modern [Saab ("Kockums") Stirling] Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) submarines in the world, which if selected by the Royal Netherlands navy, will be done in consultation with the customer using a ‘design to cost’ approach.

Having secured the cooperation of many Dutch companies, Saab and Damen are set to enhance the domestic submarine competence. This cooperation will also extend beyond the Dutch submarine project, as the two companies see a growing market for this type of advanced conventional submarines.

Both Saab and Damen are based in relatively small countries, which means that both companies must naturally be extremely good at collaboration to be able to operate successfully on an international level; it almost seems to be embedded in the DNA of both organisations. This in combination with a similar design philosophy based on cost-efficient quality and adaptive modularity means that Saab-Kockums is a perfect partner within the Dutch triple helix."

See the original on the Saab WEBSITE: at https://saab.com/stories/2019-03/how-the-saab-damen-consortium-will-meet-the-dutch-requirement-in-replacing-the-walrus-class/

On February 6, 2019 I wrote: “France's Barracuda SSN Submarine Launching in 2019 – Maybe at https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2019/02/barracuda-ssn-submarine-launching-in.htmlwith the text:

“The launching of France's delayed (laid down 2007) first of class Barracuda-Suffren class SSN will free up a good part of Naval Group's design and construction labour force.

...Once freed up the Naval Group design and construction labour force can begin to fully address Australia's huge Shortfin Barracuda (Attack class) SSK Program."

Six days later, Australia’s ABC “France maintains it will deliver Australia's $50 billion 'Barracuda' submarines on time” of February 12, 2019 at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-12/barracuda-delay-and-impact-on-australian-program/10800794 includes:

"France's visiting Defence Minister Florence Parly has assured Australia the future submarine program will run on time, despite a similar build project [of the Barracuda SSN] running three years late in her country.

In France, Naval Group has faced serious delays with another [the Barracuda] submarine project, the construction of new 'Barracuda' nuclear-powered submarines.

Despite Naval Group's three-year delay with its project in France, Ms Parly says there will be no flow on effects for Australia's program.

"It's very much related to the nuclear part of our submarines and related to new norms and controls that did not exist before," she said."

PETE COMMENT

France's current attack submarine delay is much more than a "three-year delay". The US and UK have built nuclear attack submarines in less time. Why can't France? Is France having trouble funding or prioritising its whole submarine program?

Comparing the latest Japanese, US, UK and French attack submarine builds on a time, efficiency basis:

- the Japaneselaid down first of class Soryu in 2005 and launched in 2007 = just over 2 and 2/3

years

- the US laid down first of class Virginia in 1999 and launched in 2003 = 4 years,

- the UKlaid down first of class Astute in 2001 and launched in 2007 = 7 and 1/2 years

and even that UK period to launch was considered excessive and embarrassing with “cost

overruns and delays”

Compare the above to France’s first Barracuda Suffrenlaid down December 2007 and not yet launched as at March 2019 = 11 and 1/4 years (so far).

So compared to the most efficient Japanese and the efficient (4 years) US we enter the less efficient, zone of the UK (7 and 1/2 years) with the French being the least efficient at "11 and 1/4 years (so far)".

This French inefficiency does not bode well for France’s next attack submarine build, which just happens to be Australia's future submarine. France's next domestic submarine project is to build a new ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) class.

Australia's future submarine will need to compete for limited French resources with that future French SSBN.

Pete

Following Submarine Matters'US-North Korea Missile Issues Much Broader Than Korean Peninsula, March 12, 2019, Josh on March 12 2019 made interesting comments regarding the recent history of US nuclear weapons in and around South Korea. I have bolded, added, extra links and comments in square [...] brackets. Josh wrote:

“US nuclear weapons were previously based in South Korea for decades until their removal at the end of the cold war in 1991. Around the same time, USN vessels also offloaded all tactical nuclear weapons (this would have included the B61 [nuclear bombs on US aircraft carriers]. BGM-109 [cruise missiles with nuclear warheads on US] SSNs, and probably a collection of [nuclear] depth bombs, ASROC, and SUBROC warheads.

[See Document A“A history of US nuclear weapons in South Korea” (2017) at] https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00963402.2017.1388656

It's worth noting the weapons in Korea were probably directed at Russian Pacific Fleet bases more than North Korea; Japan would not allow warhead basing on their soil (though it didn't question whether docked ships had such weapons, unlike New Zealand).

In the current context, the only relevant US weapons that could reach North Korea are strategic weapons or tactical weapons that are based on US soil. So there is no reasonable posture for the US to adopt that would further denuclearize the Korean peninsula. There are of course tens of thousands of US troops in the ROK that could be traded as a bargaining chip, as well as the economic sanctions which are far more important to the [North Korea]. However the US position is that [North] Koreamust make the compromises first - which is understandable given how many previous agreements it has breached or worked around.

Realistically the only thing that will change the status quo is Kim dying of natural causes or some kind of conflict.”

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Document Ais very interesting on US submarine issues as they relate to the Korea’s.

Document A is by Hans M. Kristensen & Robert S. Norris“A history of US nuclear weapons in South Korea” (2017) Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Vol. 73, 2017, Issue 6, Pages 349-357, Published online: 26 Oct 2017. The whole Document is published at https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00963402.2017.1388656

Snippets on submarines in 18 pageDocument Ainclude:

“Since [1991] the United States has protected South Korea (and Japan) under a nuclear umbrella made up of several types of weapons: dual-capable fighter-bombers and strategic nuclear forces in the form of bombers and submarines.¹

“...In addition to tactical nuclear forces, US strategic nuclear weapons also played (and continue to play) an important role in defending South Korea. This role has taken several forms over the years. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, for example, the US Navy suddenly began conducting port visits to South Korea with nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs)...”

“...The reason for [US nuclear armed submarine] port visits is still unclear, but the timing coincided with the period when the United States significantly reduced deployment of nonstrategic nuclear weapons in Korea. This period overlapped with the years when the United States discovered and attempted to stop South Korea’s secret program to develop nuclear weapons.⁴...”

“...The SSBN visits ended when the remaining Polaris submarines were retired in 1981, and even though the US Navy gradually built up its fleet of new Ohio-class submarines in the Pacific, American SSBNs have not visited South Korea since January 1981.

Yet Ohio SSBNs continue to play an important role in targeting North Korea. With their much longer-range missiles, Ohio SSBNs can patrol much further from their targets than earlier submarines. A 1999 inspection of the Trident submarine command and control system identified the SSBNs as “mission critical systems” of “particular importance” to US forces in South Korea (Defense Department 1999. Inspector General, Year 2000 Compliance of the Trident Submarine Command and Control System. Report Number 99-167, May 24, 1999, p. 1.http://www.dodig.mil/audit/reports/fy99/99-167.pdf. [Google Scholar], 1). Except for a lone SSBN visit to Guam in 1988, though, Ohio-class submarines did not conduct port visits to the Western Pacific for 35 years.”

That changed on October 31, 2016, when the USS Pennsylvania (SSBN-735) arrived in Guam for a highly publicized visit to promote US security commitments to South Korea and Japan.Military delegations from both countries were brought to Guam and given a tour and briefings onboard the submarine, which was carrying an estimated 90 nuclear warheads. “This specific visit to Guam reflects the United States’ commitment to its allies in the Indo-Asia-Pacific,” the US Strategic Command publicly announced, apparently a signal that the US nuclear umbrella also extends over the Indian Ocean (US Strategic Command 2016 “Public Affairs, “USS Pennsylvania Arrives in Guam for Port Visit.” October 13.
https://www.stratcom.mil/news/2016/651/USS_Pennsylvania_Arrives_in_Guam_for_Port_Visit/. [Google Scholar]).

----------------------------

See the whole interesting Document A by Hans M. Kristensen & Robert S. Norris“A history of US nuclear weapons in South Korea” (2017) Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Vol. 73, 2017, Issue 6, Pages 349-357, Published online: 26 Oct 2017 at https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00963402.2017.1388656

Pete

Russia's is developing and trial deploying the Zircon (or Tsirkon) 3M22 (NATO SS-N-33) hypersonic missile. It is too early to tell how operationally workable and effective it is.

Its main strengths are:
- its hard to shoot down or react to Mach 8 to 9 speed at high altitude and plunging
- reported manoeuvrability, and

- small enough for many "shots" from multiple platforms

Its main weaknesses are:
- its limited range (maybe only 400km from a submarine, though 1,000 from an aircraft), and
- light warhead (maybe only 200kg).

In the above Youtube (South Front, March 6, 2019):

- 4 mins 50 secs in - it can be vertically launched from Russian Oscar and Yasen submarines and

[may be small enough to be 533mm or 650mm torpedo tube launched from Akula or Kilo

submarines.]

- 5m 22s - could be launched from Russian submarines to hit US command and control facilities on

the US Atlantic coast. But given Zircon's limited range [assuming US SOSUS, RAP/FDS and

ASW platforms on the Atlantic coast] this would put the Russian submarines in danger of

“detection and destruction”.

See a transcript of the South Front Youtube here https://southfront.org/russias-zircon-hypersonic-missile-challenges-us-naval-dominance/

Russia may be in a joint venture to help India develop a Zircon-looking BrahMos-2 "HSTDV".

Russian Zircon vs Kinzhal hypersonic missiles (Artwork, table courtesy IDA Strategic Intelligence).

---

Pete

It being more than a week to April Fool’s Day the Russian Government still floated the possibility that two mothballed Typhoon SSBNs might be converted into enormous SSGNs. As the particular Typhoons have been in corrosive seawater "storage" for 13 to 15 years - updating and modifying them might take more than 5 years and cost $Billions that the Russians do not have.

ARTICLE

Defense World.Net

http://www.defenseworld.net/news/24507/Two_Russian_Typhoon_class_Subs_To_Carry_200_Kalibr_Missiles#.XJQ2uiIzbX5 on March 21, 2019 reports:

"Two Russian Typhoon-Class Subs To Carry 200 Kalibr Missiles"

"Two Russian Typhoon-class submarines, Arkhangelsk [launched 1986, decommissioned 2006, “still in reserve”] and the Severstal [launched 1989, decommissioned 2004, “still in reserve”] will be rearmed and developed in order to enable them to carry 200 Kalibr missiles each.

The Project 941 or Typhoon-class submarines had been withdrawn from service and kept at the dock of the Zvyozdochka Ship Repair Center in Severodvinsk [Russia’s Northern Fleet complex] slated for their subsequent disposal.

“We now plan to re-equip these submarines with [probably mainly land attack, but also anti-ship] Oniks, Tsirkon [aka Zircon] and 200 Kalibr missiles,” TASS reported [on the Typhoons also confusingly called “Akulas” in Russia] quoting Vice-Admiral Oleg Burtsev as saying [March 20, 2019].

"The dimensions of these submarines allow arming each of them with at least 200 cruise missiles," he said.

“American Ohio-class submarines can carry 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles and Chinese Project 055 destroyer is capable of carrying 112 cruise missiles. But our frigates belonging to the Project 22350 can currently carry only 16 of them. Subsequent frigates will get 24 of them. It is still insufficient,” he added.

Russia has also begun developing a modernized frigate under Project 22350, that is capable of carrying 48 Kalibr cruise missiles.

"The Northern Design Bureau has completed designing frigates of Project 22350M capable of carrying up to 48 Kalibr cruise missiles,” TASS quoted a source from the design bureau as saying Sunday.

The Kalibr missileswere used by Russia in Syrian operations [and see]. The Kalibr is Russian group of surface ship-, submarine-launched and airborne anti-ship and coastal anti ship (AShM), land attack cruise missiles (LACM) and anti-submarine missiles.

The country also plans to develop ground-launched, longer range version of the Kalibr cruise missile in 2019-2020, Sputnik quoted Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu as saying in early February.

The longer range version could be in excess of 310 mile range which is the limit imposed under the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty.”

COMMENT

The Russian plan might be authentic and perhaps more importantly also hold propaganda value to exceed the cruise missile capacity of each US Ohio-class SSGN. The rather vague Russian comments are surprising as the two mothballed, by now very rusty, very old Typhoons (Arkhangelsk and Severstal) have sat in water virtually forgotten for over 13 years.

The major modifications of converting Typhoon SSBNs into SSGNs might be to:

- treat and/or derust each Typhoon's massive steel outer hull and Titanium its multiple inner-pressure hulls. Russia may have lost the highly expensive industrial capability to work Titanium for submarines.

- heavily modify each of the Typhoons 20 x single ballistic missile (just over 2.4m diameter launch tubes into 20 unique multipurpose tubes that can each carry 10 Kalibr cruise missiles.

- develop a thoroughly modernised combat system electronics suite for the major change of weaponry.

- and probably replace the corroded? defueled? 2 x 33 year old nuclear reactors on each Typhoon.

The cost of updating the 30+ year old Typhoon “Arkhangelsk” and Severstal” in question may be more expensive than building 2 new current/modified Russian Borei class SSGNs.

Just more mischievous or scary Putin propaganda?

At 24,000 tonnes (surfaced) and 48,000 tonnes (submerged) the Soviet-Russian Project 941 Typhoons (photos above and below) are the largest and most expensive submarines ever built. Expensive in part because each uses 1,000s of tonnes of Titanium for its multiple pressure hulls. Titanium is hugely expensive to mine, process, work into sheets and to weld on a 1,000s tonnes scale. Like the Titanium pressured hulled Alfas the Typhoons have been dubbed "golden submarines". Their production did much to bankrupt the unbalanced Soviet economy by the late 1980s.

---

Pete

A trailer with English subtitles of "Le Chant du Loup" in English "The Wolf's Call". Much tension and action evident with a mysterious submarine closely tailing a French ballistic missile submarine. Meanwhile helicopters, divers, headquarters and a beautiful lady add excitement!

---

Thanks KQN for pointing to a French submarine movie released in France and former French North Africa on February 20, 2019.

The movie titled "Le Chant du Loup" in English variously the "The Wolf's Call".

Clicking on this link http://www.pathefilms.com/film/lechantduloup, once translated reveals the film's:

Synopsis

"A young man [Chanteraide the Sonar Operator] has the rare gift of recognizing every sound he hears. On board a French [Rubis class exterior? acting as a French "SNLE" ie. SSBN] nuclear submarine, everything rests on him, the Golden Ear."

"Deemed infallible, he makes an error that puts the crew in danger of death. He wants to regain the confidence of his comrades but his quest leads them to an even more dramatic situation."

"In the world of nuclear deterrence and misinformation, they find themselves trapped in [a crisis spiralling rapidly out of control]."

A movie directed and written by Antonin Baudry

Starring:

- François Civil as Chanteraide the sonar operator with the "Golden Ear"
- Omar Sy,
- Mathieu Kassovitz
- Reda Kateb, and
- Paula Beer the obligatory beautiful lady in a man's world!

Released in France first, February 20, 2019 "

PETE COMMENT

In real life for a sonar operator, there would be many sensor software to electronic database/library means to determine what type of submarine and other in-water and helicopter sounds are out there.

The Wolf film appear to have many SSN vs SSBN parallels with The Hunt for Red October. Can the Wolf (music by Tomandandy) match Red October's Academy Award winning sound editing?

But are they different?

Sweden Saab Kockums has just 2 orders for its A26 - and the customer is the Swedish Navy. Export orders (eg. for the Netherlands' Walrus Replacement and Poland's ORKA Program) are desperately needed:

- to share the developments costs for the A26

- for Saab's bottom line, and

- for foreign exchange for Sweden.

Below is some of the most recent material on the A26

Poland's Casimir Pulaski Foundation

From Poland's Casimir Pulaski Foundation paper: “Poland’s ‘Orka’ submarine programme. Part 3. The A26 submarines – Swedish Offer: Pulaski Policy Paper No 8, 2018 May 11, 2018 at

https://pulaski.pl/en/pulaski-policy-paper-polands-orka-submarine-programme-part-3-the-a26-submarines-swedish-offer/ Note Poland's possible requirement of "3 vertical launchers with 18 Tomahawk missiles" are possible.

---

Sweden's FMV

A Swede /Kjell has pointed out the the Swedish Defence Materiel Administration (FMV) published perhaps the latest specification of the (being built) A26 submarine. Other sources (eg. Wikipedia) are largely reliant on 2015 information while the FMV specifications are dated April 13, 2018 at
http://fmv.se/sv/Projekt/Ubat-typ-A26/

Cutaway diagram of A26 on FMV paper of April 13, 2018 http://fmv.se/sv/Projekt/Ubat-typ-A26/
---

The A26's ultra-modern looking but maybe cramped(?) Control Room on FMV paper of
April 13, 2018 http://fmv.se/sv/Projekt/Ubat-typ-A26/.

---

Pete

Following yesterday's A26 article, I have been thinking about Sweden's next 10 year submarine replacement plan.

It may be that, of Sweden's 2 Södermanland + 3 Gotland class submarines:

Availability

- 3 will be available for service within 1 to 2 days,
- 1 has its crew on courses, leave, with some short (2 week) maintenance of sub
- 1 will be in deep maintenance (can include mid-life upgrade) for 12 months every 9? years.

Replacement Plan

- 2 Södermanlands (launched 1988, received AIP in 2004-2005,
:  were to remain in service to 2019-20 when replaced by 1 or 2 A26s
:  but as A26s will only be in service from 2024 and 2025 (see A26 Timeline below) then 1 or
2 Södermanlands may need to remain in service till 2024 and 2025 (at 36 and 37 years old)
or 1 or 2 Södermanlands will need to retire. This is particularly as Södermanland stealth, diesels,
AIP and combat systems become obsolete (or wear out) and are more expensive to maintain.

So from 2019-20 to 2024-25 Sweden may need to only rely on its 3 Gotland class subs
-  launched 1995-1996,
- fortunately mid-life updated progressively from 2018 to probably 2020 (for the last one).
- See Gotland mid-life updates on FMV video of March 12, 2019 with English captions.
Updates include new:
: stealthier IT
: Stirling AIP (3rd? generation)
: a 2-3m? mid-hull plug for Vertical Multi-purpose Lock (VMPL)? or some other use?
: optronic masts
: sensor suite
: crew comfort

COMMENTS

Mid-life updates might efficiently work for 8 to 10 years, permitting the 3 Gotlands to be progressively replaced by 3? (or 4?) A26s from 2025 to 2030. The 3? (or 4?) issue depends on Swedish Navy, Saab and FMV requirments and any export success.

Submarines serving in the Swedish Navy may go on two week missions, with just one full submersion-contraction cycle and wholey on AIP, no need to use diesels. So this means their hulls might theoretically last 40 years and with very little diesel engine wear.

Image from 2015 (if not earlier) most likely from Saab Kockums. Image now on many websites. Click on image to enlarge.

---

A26 Timeline (2015-2025)

From FMV's April 13, 2018 document http://fmv.se/sv/Projekt/Ubat-typ-A26/.

· 2015 FMV orders two A26 submarines by Saab Kockums

· 2015 Continued system work and construction

· 2015 Production begins

· 2021 Launch of the first submarine

· 2021 Harbor Acceptance Test (HAT). Verification of systems that can be done at quay. Closes
when the systems meet the requirements and the boat is safe to carry out sea samples.

· 2022-2023 Sea Acceptance Test (SAT). Verification of requirements that require the submarine to
be at sea

· 2023 Delivery of the first submarine to FMV

· 2024 Validation of the first submarine's ability before delivery to the Armed Forces

· 2024 Delivery of the second submarine to FMV

· 2025 Validation of the other submarine's ability before delivery to the Armed Forces

Export Sales?

The Netherlands and Poland may await the first (Swedish Navy) A26's submerged, at sea, trials, from 2022. This is to see that it is an efficient, problem free sub.

The competing TKMS Typre 212CD might only be ready for sea trials 2 years later, in 2024, and Naval Group timelines are less certain. So it may be well into the 2020s before the Netherlands and Poland finally make a firm selection of their replacement submarines.

Pete

Vigilis, former USN submariner of Molten Eaglefame, points out a humourous book by a former UK nuclear submarine officer: one Eric Thompsonwho wrote:

On Her Majesty's Nuclear Service (in hardcover, published 28 February 2018)

Stephen Stewart for Scotland’s Daily Record, 5 March 2018 writes https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/scottish-submariner-lifts-lid-extraordinary-12125812

"Scottish submarine captain who had finger on nuclear button reveals chilling Cold War secrets

Eric Thompson (November 2003 photo above) says he was issued with secret letter from the prime minister to be opened in the event of nuclear war.

He had his finger on the nuclear button, ready to unleash World War III.

Now, former Faslane Commodore Eric Thompson – who commanded five nuclear submarines during his career – has lifted the lid on the chilling secrets of the Cold War. Eric revealed that the frontline subs were issued with a secret letter from the prime minister to be opened in the event of nuclear armageddon.

The note – which was kept in a safe on board – would tell the crew to either retaliate by launching a cataclysmic nuclear strike or stand down. Thankfully, Eric never had to open his letter.

Eric, who was born in Coatbridge [in Scotland], won a scholarship to Britannia Royal Naval College Dartmouth at 16. He served as an engineer officer before going on to submarines.

In 1969, the early part of his career, Eric ready for action aboard the HMS Andrew [a conventional sub retrofitted with a 4 inch deck gun to take care of blockade-running junks in Southeast Asia] (Image: Collect Unknown)

---

Nearly 40 years later, he retired as Commodore of Faslane, Britain’s principal nuclear submarine base.

Among the dangers of the Cold War, Eric also shares some funnier times.

He said: “Britain’s nuclear deterrent Polaris submarines were continuously at 15 minutes’ notice to launch a nuclear counter-strike on Russia in response to any Soviet nuclear strike against the UK.

“As I served in Polaris submarines during this period, I can testify to our readiness being a grim but effective reality. On taking office, every prime minister selects three nuclear deputies from his or her ministers.

[Eric Thompson] former top naval officer performing stand up (Image: Centre Press Agency).

---

“They are appointed to take over the firing decision should the prime minister be killed.

...“This is called the letter of last resort and, sometimes, the letter from the grave. It is kept in a safe within a safe in the submarine control room. One such letter was held in my submarine, HMS Revenge.

...Eric served in five submarines, two squadrons, the staff of Submarine HQ and the Ministry of Defence. His MBE was awarded for leadership during a submarine emergency on patrol.

He would often have to go on a 10-week nuclear deterrence patrol on a sub with no contact from the outside world. In his new book, he argues that nuclear weapons were directly responsible for the avoidance of World War III.

...Eric stokes controversy in his book by claiming [still leading] Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn could leave Britain’s defences vulnerable.

He wrote: “In 2015, Jeremy Corbyn, a lifelong nuclear activist and one-time vice chairman of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, became leader of the Labour Party. "Were he to be elected as prime minister, he could, hypothetically, select the ‘do not retaliate’ option. If a potential aggressor were to be aware of this, our independent nuclear deterrent would have lost all credibility.

...He said: “I had brought some exploding cigar tips for insertion in the wardroom panatelas that were passed round after mess dinners.

"One night, I snuck the wardroom cigar box into my cabin, removed two panatelas from their tubes, unwrapped their cellophane, inserted the explosive tips and returned the box to its cupboard.

“The other spiked cigar was either not smoked or failed to explode. I had not considered that at the end of our patrol, we would be handing the boat over to the other crew, including the cigar box.

“A tradition of the deterrent programme is that a VIP meets every returning nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine in the Clyde estuary and rides it back to Faslane.

A snap from Eric's book of Faslane [UK SSBN base] in 1998. [Guess where the Trident D5 missiles are likely interchanged!] (Image: Handout).

“VIPs range from the prime minister down to senior admirals. Another tradition is that after lunch, the VIP is invited into the captain’s tiny cabin for coffee and a cigar.

“Four months later, the captain of the other crew was entertaining his VIP guest, the commander-in-chief, in the privacy of his cabin when the end of the great man’s cigar exploded.

“Until writing this book, the perpetrator of that joke has never been identified. In military speak, it’s called, ‘Third party targeting’.”...”

SEE WHOLE DAILY RECORD ARTICLE HERE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also see biodata by Eric in Eric's own website Welcome to Eric's World which contains a blog, Short Fiction, "Poem of the Week" and even "Burns" (Robert Burns club information) etc.

Pete

An excellent Youtube on the many aspects of electronic warfare (EW). From Covert Cabal,

January 13, 2019.

---

It has obviously been made with US DoD cooperation. Featuring:

1 min, 15 secs Boeing EA-18G Growler

1:35 Chaff

2:45 Aircraft Decoys

3:03 eg: the ALE-50 Towed Decoy System

3:55 How EC-130H Compass Call and EA-18Gs fool enemy radars

5:50 How to trick airborne radars

6:52 Jamming communications

7:20 Russian jamming arrays, eg Murmansk-BN eg. in Crimea

8:05 Jamming GPS and other satellite positioning systems

8:52 But advanced US jets are partly reliant on GPS! StormBreaker glide bomb.

9:22 Jamming in spotlight due to Western military's increasing use of UAV "drones" eg. Reaper and
recce RQ-170

9:52 Cheap mini-drones as assassination weapons, Venezuela.

10:50 Electronic counter-countermeasures (ECCM)

11:05 Anti-jamming weapons

11:15 Frequency hopping as in airborne AESA radars.

12:17 Infrared search and track (IRST) used by Russia.

12:50 Many frequency bands not yet exploited by EW

13:05 Use of ALQ-144 and lasers protecting combatting MANPADS

13:53 Electronic Support Measues / ELINT (electronic intelligence) missions described

14:52 The Murmask-BN ground station also intercepts signals

Some WWII Battle of Britain radar history

16:35 Importance of modern EW.

16:50 EW important to NATO

Pete

Nothing big in submarine-istan today. Soooo, here is a useful Infographic Show video with many submarine engineering, historical and health realities. Don't be deceived by the kiddie-cartoon style.

Perhaps start 1 minute 20 seconds in on spherical submersible vs tubular submarine strengths. Naval submarines must be tubular to house crew, electronics, weapons, to move quickly and hydro-dynamically, etc.

2:05 A submarine must protect its crew by maintaining liveable air pressure. High pressure oxygen
and nitrogen dangers. [Meanwhile too little Oxygen can cause headaches, eventually death. Too
much Oxygen - greater danger from static-sparks causing fire/explosion.]

3:03 Subs very limited in diving ranges. "Design""Test" and "Crush" depths.

3:55 Soviet, now Russian Akula class SSN in the 1980s. [Preceding Titanium Alfa class submarine
even deeper diving.]

4:01 In response US built the Seawolf SSNs with crush depths maybe over 1,000m

5:22 DSV Alvin submersible secretly [found and raised a thermonuclear weapon (true) and] located
the wreck of the USS Scorpion (SSN-589) with Scorpion still armed with nuclear torpedoes.

6:15 NASA now very much into deep diving submersible research for Saturn's moon Titan.

Pete

Following Submarine Matters'Current Heavyweight Russian Torpedos of July 1, 2015 is an update on advanced Russian torpedos, mines and a decoy.

JSC Tactical Missiles Corporation (KTRV) is headquartered in Korolyov, Moscow Oblast.

The Corporation:

“has developed and produced guided missiles, tactical missile systems for air, ground and naval platforms, as well as rocket and space systems for more than 70 years.

...is a united system of design bureaus as well as experimental and batch plants, which provide product life support, including development, production, testing, after-sales service, upgrading and disposal of the products, and

...is a leading developer of smart guided weapons for the 5th generation aircraft system. 14 new high-precision weapons are being prepared for batch-production."

And also researches and produces, smart bombs, modules/launchers, and airborne systems/equipment.

Relevant to Submarine Matters,KTRV also researches and produces naval weapons, mostly at the Dagdizel Plant, [also see on Company Website], in Kaspiysk, Russia, including the:

TE-2 see all details torpedo (TE-2-02 above source http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/naval-systems/shipborne-weapons/te2-02/) - Multipurpose electric remotely controlled 534mm heavyweight (HWT) homing , launched from submarines and ships with targets being outher submarines and ships. (Also see http://eng.ktrv.ru/upload/iblock/46b/te_2_site.jpg )

UGST see all details torpedo (above) - multipurpose depth homing HWT 530mm. (Photo source http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/naval-systems/shipborne-weapons/ugst/.) Also http://eng.ktrv.ru/upload/iblock/609/ugst_site.jpg )

MDM 2 see all details Sea Bottom Mine - designed to hit all types of surface ships and submarines in surface and submerged positions, 630mm diameter, with 975kg of explosive. (Photo above - http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/naval-systems/shipborne-weapons/mdm-2/ also http://eng.ktrv.ru/upload/iblock/25b/mdm_2_site.jpg)

MDM 3 see all details Sea Bottom Mine - designed to hit all types of small surface ships and landing craft, 450mm diameter, with 350kg explosive. (Photo above also http://eng.ktrv.ru/upload/iblock/0ef/mdm_3_site.jpg) and

MG-74ME see all details decoy - self-propelled acoustic countermeasure, heavy weight, 533mm. (Artwork above http://eng.ktrv.ru/upload/iblock/c9c/mg_74_site_2.jpg)

Pete

Following yesterday's article - the Soviets, now Russians have been developing heavyweight torpedos since at least the 1930s.

Older Russian Type 53 (530mm) torpedos were limited by their fuel type to a range of less than 20km. The Fizik-1s (aka UGSTs) and Fizik-2s (aka Futlyar) torpedos use Otto Fuel II perhaps giving them a range of up to 60km.

If the Russians have followed the US Mark 48 evolution the Russian Fiziks are likely to be effective at progressively shallower and deeper depths.

The Russian Navy Fizik-2 believed to be capable of a top speed of 60 knots. Compared with the Fizik-1 the Fizik-2 features improved homing systems (perhaps including heat seeking) remote control system and maybe longer range.

Unlike the Fizit-1 the Fizik-2 is probably Russian use only, ie. not available for export. This follows a typical domestic use vs export capabilities demarcation of not selling the latest military secrets. It will be interesting to see if China offers Russia enough money to buy some Fizit-2s - for subsequent Chinese reverse engineering-then production.

The Fizik-2 can be released by both surface fighting ships and submarines engaging both platforms from safe ranges. The Fizik-2 torpedo test program was completed by the Russian Navy by the end of 2017 with the new weapon being deployed from 2018.

A Fizik-2might need an effective depth as deep as 1,000m to hit the US deepest diving Seawolf class SSNs/Special missions.

FIZIK-1 (aka UGST) AND FIZIK-2 (aka FUTLYAR) TABLE

RUSSIAN 530mm TORPEDOS	Fizik-1 UGST (primary source)	Fizik-2 Futlyar (secondary source)
In Service/Deployed	2014-2015 last of Type 53s	2017-2018
Designed/developed by		Tactical Missiles Corp & "Morteplotehnika"
Both Built by Tactical Missiles Corporation“Gidropribor’s”	Dagdizel Plant	Dagdizel Plant
Deployed in	All Russian & some foreign subs	First on Boreys and Yasens
Fuel	Otto fuel II and see	Otto fuel II (likely)
Propulsion	propeller?	Propulsor (pump jet)
Diameter	530mm	533mm
Length	7.2m	7.2m
Weight, max	2,200kg	?kg
Weight of explosive charge, min	300kg	300kg
Maximum range, up to	40km (export) 60km (Russia only)	60? km
Speed
- I mode	50 knots	60 knots
- II mode	40 knots	? knots
Running depth	up to 500m	>500m
Firing depth, up to	400m	400m
Homing system effective operating radius:	eg. wake	eg. wake and heat seeking
- against submarine, up to	2.5km	2.5km
- against surface ship, up to	1.2km	1.2km
Surface ship wake indication time, up to	350 seconds	? seconds
Fuze type	contact/proximity	contact/proximity
Length of command wire
- torpedo wire dispenser, up to	25km	?km
- towed wire dispenser, up to	5km	?km

What may be Fizit-1/Fizit-2 torpedos. Note the shrouded/pump-jet in the blurry photo below. (Photos courtesy Russian Domestic Weapons and Military Equipment website, April 3, 2019)

Pete

Below is a Chinese Yuan class (Type 039A/041) submarine Table, based on several sources. It has the latest figures I’ve seen. But given the almost black box nature of Chinese submarines it can always be updated. Interestingly there is Taiwanese confirmation that Yuans have three MTU 16V396 SE8 diesel engines (thankyou Germany :). It is unclear what weapons are being phased in or phased out. Crew numbers vary from 36 to 58.

Western intelligence first became aware of the Yuan-class (NATO reporting name) submarine in 2005. The class was designated Yuan because is was radically modified from the Chinese Song and Russian Kilo classes.

The Yuans feature a pair of sail-mounted hydroplanes, four stern diving planes, and a single large propeller seen previously on the Songs. However, the Yuan’s hull and sail designs suggest heavy Russian Kilo class influence.

Yuans are equipped with an indigenously-developed AIP system. It is believed that it is a 100 kilowatt Stirling cycle developed by CSIC Shanghai Maritime Diesel Engine Research Institute (SMDERI, or 711 Institute).

At least four variants of the Yuan have been identified (or designated) so far: Type 039A, Type 039AG, Type 039B, and Type 039 (upgrade) which differ slightly in appearance and sail shape. A possibly new type 039C (which will carry a new NATO reporting name) has been suspected.

Yuans might approach the quality of the latest SSKs deployed by Russian and Western navies. At least 17 Yuans have arguably been identified so far and up to 3 more may be under construction.

NATO Reporting Name	YUAN class
Chinese Variants	Type 039A, 039AG, 039B, 039 (upgrade), 039C(?)
Export Variants	S20 (general designation), S26T (Thailand) and 039 (upgrade) for Pakistan
Designer	CSIC China Ship Design & Research Centre (701 Institute)
Builders	CSIC Wuchang Shipbuilding, Wuhan
First in Commission	2005
Hull stealth	cabin-raft (shock absorbers) help reduce noise by over 35 dB, anechoic tiles
Country/shipyard	Shanghai Jiangnan Changxing Factory Wuchang Shipyard China/
Dimensions	Length 77.6m, beam 8.4-8.6m, draught 5.5m or 6.7m?.
Displacement (ton)	2,570 ton (surfaced) 3,600 ton (submerged)
Power system / shaft horsepower	3 xMTU 16V396 SE8 diesel engines, 5 MW 1 x Propulsion motor Stirling AIP Single-axis seven-blade propeller
Speed	12 knots (surfaced) 20 knots (dived)
Range	?
Endurance	?
Design depth Test Depth	300 to 400m 550m
Surface detection / counter system	Periscope group (possible photo-sensing equipment) 1 x Electronic support system 1 x I-band plane search radar
Underwater detection system	Shipboard master/passive search/attack sonar Passive ranging sonar 205 side passive array sonar
Combat system	Integrated command and weapon control system
Crew	36 to 58
Armament	6 x 533mm torpedo tubes. Can use Yu-6 (Otto fuel II) and Yu-9 electric torpedos, YJ-18 (anti-ship and Land attack missiles), YJ-8X (C-80X)anti-ship missiles, mines, (UUVs in future).

SOURCES

The figures in black are from Taiwanese source 039A/B/C class diesel-electric attack submarinehttp://www.mdc.idv.tw/mdc/navy/china/039ab.htm.

Figures in red from http://sinodefence.com/type039a_yuan-class/

Green underlined are from Wikipedia

A Yuan submarine. As well as Song and Kilo influences its hull shape definetly looks Japanese Oyashio class submarine influenced... (Photo courtesy sinodefence).

---

Pete

Chinese nuclear and conventional submarines are spending more time in the Indian Ocean. To "welcome" them Australia and India are stepping up anti-submarine warfare (ASW) exercises.

Four Royal Australian Navy (RAN) ships and one submarine arrived at India’s major naval base East, Visakhapatnam, on April 2, 2019. This was to take part in AUSINDEX-19. From April 7 to 11, 2019 the RAN and Indian forces will mainly participate in ASW exercises in the Bay of Bengal. In a couple of years’ time another AUSINDEX “21” will likely be hosted by Australia.

HMAS Collins drying off before passage to India (Photo courtesy shipspotting).

---

The Australian vessels participating are: the landing helicopter dock HMAS Canberra (L02); the frigates HMAS Newcastle (FFG 06) and HMAS Parramatta (FFH 154); replenishment oiler HMAS Success (OR 304);and submarine HMAS Collins (SSG 73, launched in 1993).

The Australian aviation element will include MRH-90 Taipan and MH-60R Seahawk ‘Romeo’ helicopters on the RAN vessels, along with a P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft (MPA).

The Indian Navy is represented by the: destroyer INS Ranvijay (D55); frigate INS Sahyadri (F49); and corvettes INS Kora (P61) and INS Kiltan (P30). Also participating is the Sindhughosh-Kilo class conventional submarine INS Sindhukirti (S61) (youtube above).

Satellite imagery of a Dornier MPA - spooked by Spitfires.
---

Helicopters on the Indian vessels will include Sea King Mk 42B and Chetak. Indian land based aircraft will include Dornier and P-8I “Neptune” MPAs and Hawk Advanced Jet Trainers.

AUSINDEX-19 features the greatest variety and number of Australian and Indian vessels and aircraft/helicopters of the AUSINDEX exercises to date, in order to monitor Chinese submarine activities in the Indian Ocean.

Sources include https://defpost.com/royal-australian-navy-ships-submarine-arrive-at-visakhapatnam-india-to-participate-in-exercise-ausindex-19/

Pete

Japan is rapidly wearing out its F-15Js due to a high recent tempo of intercepts/escort outs of intruding Chinese and Russian aircraft. The 147 x F-35s Japan is buying are not as aerodynamically suited to peacetime intercept then escort out role.

Glib statements theat F-35s can intercept aircraft with missiles, often beyond visual range are of no help to the delicate task of manoeuvring close to intruding aircraft in peacetime and of course being seen by the intruder to do so. The F-35 does not fill the F-15's peacetime intercept role well.

Basically and in addition to the 147 x F-35s Japan needs faster more manoeuvrable twin jet aircraft to take over the existing F-15J role. Japan has very limited replacement options, as:
- the US does not trust its allies to have F-22s.
- Japan cannot develop a duplicate of the F-22 (eg. the X-2 Shinshin) in under 2 or 3 decades and at
huge cost
- the Eurofighter Typhoon looks tempting noting its Rate of climb: 62,600 ft/min is better than
the F-15's and Typhoon Thrust/weight is 1.15
- but alliance pressures with associated and trade/foreign exchange pressures may mean another
purchase of available US aircraft is the only politically realistic course.

So, in addition to the 147 x F-35s Japan may need to buy (say 50?) US aircraft. Maybe:

- Super Hornets. BUT its Rate of climb of 44,882 ft/min is only marginally better
than the F-35's 45,000 ft/min and the Super Hornet's Thrust/weight: 0.93 at 1.1 is not much better
than the F-35s Thrust/weight of 0.87 to 1.07. Also Japan is not familiar with the Super Hornet and
does not have logistic infrastructure for it.

OR

- New F-15s. These are better suited for the peacetime intercept niche/role noting Japan's
F-15J's Rate of climb is >50,000 ft/min and Thrust/weight: 1.12. F-15s can climb and move faster,
manoeuvre and slow down more quickly to escort intruders out more quickly.

So obtaining near new F-15s (which may mean new parts to assemble in Japan) and could mean the F-15SE "Silent Eagle".

Alternatively cheaper/less advanced F-15s or even return to Typhoons as options?

Pete

In a Joint Department of Defence Ministers’ Media Release is was announced on 7 April 2019

at https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/minister/cpyne/media-releases/attack-class-submarine-subcontract-signed

“Attack Class Submarine subcontract signed

7 April 2019

Joint Media Release

[The Hon Christopher Pyne MP
Minister for Defence and]

Senator the Hon Linda Reynolds CSC
Minister for Defence Industry

The first major equipment subcontract for the Future Submarine Program was signed today between Naval Group and MTU Friedrichshafen GmbH (MTU) for the design of the Diesel Generator Rectifier (DGR) for the Attack class submarine to turn mechanised energy into electricity.

Minister for Defence, the Hon Christopher Pyne MP said awarding this contract achieves a critical milestone in progress of the Program, with the design of the DGR a critical component of the overall Attack class design.

“I am very happy to announce that after a robust procurement process, MTU has been selected as the first major equipment subcontractor for the Attack class submarine,” Minister Pyne said.

“MTU has committed to establishing the necessary industrial capability in Australia, to deliver and support the DGR - a key element of achieving the sovereign build - operation and sustainment of the Attack class submarine,” Minister Pyne said.

Minister for Defence Industry, Senator the Hon Linda Reynolds CSC, said while the contract is directly with MTU, the company would leverage its existing strategic partnership with Penske Power Systems Australia.

“MTU will work with Penske during the design phase and will then grow Penske’s capacity in Australia. Importantly, this will transfer the technology and knowledge associated with this capability to Australia,” Minister Reynolds said.

“The DGR subcontract is part of the Government’s investment in the Attack class submarine, part of the creation of a sovereign naval shipbuilding enterprise and the Government’s continuous naval shipbuilding capability.””

COMMENT

MTU was one of the 2 German diesel makers predicted by Submarine Matters on March 5, 2019, at "German" Diesels to be on Australia’s future Attack class submarines” following Jean-Michel Billig of Naval Group announcing:

“Diesel generators [for Australia’s future Attack class submarine] will be German...”

So the diesel builder for Australia's future submarine is MTU diesels based in Friedrichshafen, Germany. The diesel type will most likely be the MTU 12V4000U83 (peak mechanical output may be 1,500kW) (photo below). "12V" means it is a V12. Less likely selected is an older diesel,
the MTU 16V396SE84, used since the 1980s.

The March 5, 2019 article correctly pointed to Penske Power Systems as the MTU supplier in Australia. Penske has a branch office in Edinburgh, Adelaide a few kms from where the Attack class submarines will be built (at Osborne, Adelaide).

Whether the diesels are MTU 4000s or 396s Anonymous on March 15, 2019 advised there will likely be 6 of them to comfortably generate the 6,000kW required for the 4,500 tonne (surfaced) future Attack-class submarine.

The choice by Australia and Naval Group of MTU diesels is a step in the right direction. The main problem of the preceding Collins class was probably the choice of a small, failing company diesel. In contrast MTU are used on many trucks, surface ships and for many other uses. In fact MTU diesels are probably the most frequently used diesels for diesel-electric submarines worldwide. Any bugs or adjustments required for the Attack-class' MTU diesels should be detected early and then be able to rely on MTU's very large industrial base for rectification.

An MTU 12V4000U83 diesel for submarine (With "Roger Gleeson, National Manager - Defence Programmes Group" standing next to it - see Penske Australia and New Zealand website 2017).

---

Pete and Anonymous

The Japanese Air Force announced https://www.mod.go.jp/asdf/news/houdou/H31/310409_2030.pdf

[The following has been translated from Japanese by Pete]:

On the disappearance of the radar track of Misawa base station F-35A

(First report) Today, April 9 (Tuesday), the radar track of F-35A belonging to Misawa base disappeared. We are currently searching for it.

1 Date of occurrence: 19:27 April 9 (Tuesday)

2 Occurrence place: Aomori Prefecture Eastern Pacific Ocean (approximately 135 km east of Misawa Air Base)

3 unit name: Third Air Corps 302th Squadron

4 models, number of machines, etc: F-35A x 1 machine (1 crew)

5 Situation of the pilot: Details are under review.

6 There is no information on damage information at the moment.”

The Japanese Ministry of Defense [has suspended] flights of all remaining F-35As at the Misawa Air Base for the time being, Iwaya added.

The Japanese F-35 fighter jet missing in the Pacific could be a major security headache for the U.S. if Russia or China locate the state-of-the-art fighter jet first, experts warn.

COMMENT

Japan's (and US joint) Misawa Air Base is on the northern tip of Japan's home island of Honshu (see Misawa in red on map below)

One would normally expect some emergency signal, radar and/or satellite signals if the F-35 crashed.

Has the pilot defected with his F-35?

Pete

Australia's future Attack class submarine needs 6,000kW electrical output

Russian Submarine AIP project “Suffocating” due to "Underfunding"

Interesting Saab-Damen Presentation on their Walrus Replacement Plan

France least efficient Attack Submarine Builder - much more than "three-year delay"

US nuclear weapons in and around South Korea

Good March 2019 Youtube Russian Zircon hypersonic missile SUBMARINE launched

Extraordinary Russian Comments on Typhoon submarines to carry 200 cruise missiles

New French Submarine Movie: The Wolf's Call / Le Chant du Loup

Latest A26 submarine data and diagrams - Part One

Swedish Navy subs Södermanlands + Gotlands => A26s, Part Two

Grim humourous career of Eric Thompson, UK nuclear sub officer.

"Scottish submarine captain who had finger on nuclear button reveals chilling Cold War secrets

Excellent youtube on Electronic Warfare - Airborne & Ground Stations

Many submarine engineering, historical and health realities.

Advanced Russian Torpedos, Mines and Acoustic Decoy

Russia's not for export Advanced Fizik-2 aka "Futlyar" Torpedo - Part Two

China's Mighty Mysterious Yuan submarines - Part One

Australian Armada visits India - mainly Anti-Submarine AUSINDEX-19

Japan’s F-15s Wearing Out - F-35s Unsuited to Peacetime Intercept Role

Australia’s Attack-class submarine diesels likely MTU 12V4000U83s

Has a Japanese pilot defected with his F-35A or Crashed?